“Broadcasters play a vital role by informing and educating the public about the realities of climate change and the costs of inaction. Armed with information, citizens are better equipped to push for meaningful and responsible follow-through from their elected representatives. This is all the more essential in the final days before Copenhagen.”

Statement by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for UNESCO’s International Conference on Broadcast Media and Climate ChangeAt a UNESCO conference in September of 2009 on how to best sell the global warming hoax to selected target audiences, spokesman and media-manager of the UN’s Framework Convention on Climate Change Eric Hall called for the creation of “an imagination, and a vision” through works of fiction for people to chew on in the run-up and exceeding the Copenhagen conference of that same year.

“That”, Hall explained, “will come through film, it will come through soap operas, it will come through reality TV, it will come through novels.”

He made the statement at the conference “Broadcast Media and Climate Change”, organized by the United Nations Scientific and Cultural Organisation. Attended by a wide range of public and private broadcasters from around the globe, the meetings were recorded on tape for all to see and hear, highlighting the need for- as one attendee described it: “raising awareness on climate change worldwide”.

To put Eric Hall’s call for fiction-induced mind control into context, here follows a short summary of the conference. Because the video’s are copyright-protected, they are not posted here (I have included the accurate time-codes so the reader may easily look them up). The entire transcript archive of the conference can be accessed here.

Jean Reveillon, Director General of the European Broadcasting Union, outlines the mission at the very start of the conference (Session 1, 00:8:36):

“We believe that the subject at hand is of great importance and the very idea that people from the media- and in particular broadcasters- be able to come together and reflect on the best way to cover information on climate change in order to provide the best possible public service mission that is ours to the world (…)”

During the first session of the conference, we see a familiar face. Mr. IPCC and co-receiver of the Nobel peace-prize Rajendra K. Pachauri tells us via satellite link (Session 1, 01:05:00):

“Earlier speakers have referred to the importance of bringing about behavioural changes- and may I submit that these behavioural changes would essentially be in the nature of changes in lifestyles. There a several things that we can do in our individual lives and I think the broadcasting community perhaps needs to go out and tell people- and create a grass-roots movement (…).”

When broadcasters tell people what to do, any movement as a result of it would of course no longer be grass-roots. Vice-Chair of the IPCC, Jean-Pascal Van Ypersele, seconds Mr. Pachauri’s statements, saying (Session 1, 01:12:08):

“We are very much convinced in the IPCC that media- in particular broadcast media which talks to so many people at the same time- have a particular role to inform and educate the citizens throughout the world; and the IPCC is really keen on collaborating with you and trying to provide the best information, the most understandable information so that you can do your very important work.”

In response, the Director General of the European Broadcasting Union immediately replied:

“Thank you very much. And indeed I can confirm that we from the media want to do our best to accomplish that mission.”

Another UN PR-person states (Session 1, 01:19:42):

“It is very important that the media seize this moment and help the United Nations and help others if they can. Very soon the United Nations will be putting out as part of its campaign a public service announcement. We hope you will work with us as far as that is concerned. I also pray that you’ll examine all roads. You look truly at revolutionary ways on climate change coverage.”

“I’ve never thought it is part of the journalists’ job to try to inject an artificial and spurious balance into an unbalanced reality. If I have been sent to do a story on Apartheid or poverty or starvation, I hope to God I would not have tried to do a balanced story. And I think the same applies to climate change.”

Even more interesting than the statement itself is the fact that it is not included in the transcript of his speech, posted here on the UNESCO-website.

But the most curious statement coming out of the mouth of a UN communications person is that uttered by Eric Hall- chief PR-man at the United Nations. Hall outlined the way that climate change can best be hammered into the collective is through works of fiction (Session 2, 00:39:06):

“Probably the majority of the world does not read news at all. They don’t look at news as to change, to get their information or to change their behaviour. If climate change is about behavioural change, ultimately which I believe it is, then from a media perspective you must, you must look at it in a way that it’s not just about news. It’s about creating an imagination, and a vision, of what a climate change world- or a successfully avoided climate change world- will look like. That will come through film, it will come through soap operas, it will come through reality TV, it will come through novels.”

Hall draws an analogy with media-coverage in the Cold War era:

“If we did not have that visual imagination from the non-news part of the media about what a post-nuclear world would have looked like, we would have been in much more serious trouble that we have been if we wouldn’t have got the kind of agreements we had on the nuclear problem – itself a similar human civilization threatening problem.”

As the unearthed material out of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit’s main server has revealed a 62 megabyte zip file, the data has been fudged to convince unsuspecting audiences that “the debate is over”.

The intruded central computer was not only filled to the brim with obvious and attempted ostracizing of scientists who don’t blindly follow the leader, the files have also revealed that the folks of the IPCC made use or considered making use of a disinformation campaign using the fear-card through a “communication agency” called Futerra.

The agency describes itself as “the sustainability communications agency” and serves such global players as Shell, Microsoft, BBC, the UN Environment Programme, the UK government and the list goes on. The co-founder of Futerra, Ed Gillespie explains:

“For brands to succeed in this new world order, they will have to become eco, ethical and wellness champions.”

The document included within the climategate treasure-chest is called ‘Rules of the Game’ and shows deliberate deception on the part of this agency to ensure that the debate would indeed be perceived as being settled. When facts do not convince, they reasoned, let us appeal to emotions in order to get the job done.

Outlining the “rules of the game” in regards to climate change communication strategies, Futerra considers these rules as a “first step to using sophisticated behaviour change modelling and comprehensive evidence from around the world to change attitudes towards climate change.”

“We need to think radically”, proclaim the authors, “and the Rules of the Game are a sign that future campaigns will not be “business as usual.””

First Rule as outlined by Futerra is called “Blowing away Myths”. Pressing the point that any company wishing to sell global warming must be cautious:

“Fear can create apathy if individuals have no ‘agency’ to act upon the threat. Use fear with great caution.”

Arrogantly stating to “Forget the climate change detractors”, the document goes on to say that “Those who deny climate change science are irritating, but unimportant.” Futerra also stresses that “There is no ‘rational man’” and “Information can’t work alone.”

The second Rule all should abide by is “a new way of thinking”. “Once we’ve eliminated the myths”, the report goes on to say, “there is room for some new ideas.” These include:

“Climate change must be ‘front of mind’ before persuasion works”, Futerra says. “Currently, telling the public to take notice of climate change is as successful as selling tampons to men” and “people don’t realise (or remember) that climate change relates to them.”

Another one: “Use transmitters and social learning”. Futerra proposes targeting “trendsetters” to persuade people to acknowledge climate change as a genuine threat to them: “people learn through social interaction, and some people are better teachers and trendsetters than others. Targeting these people will ensure that messages seem more trustworthy and are transmitted more effectively.”

Under the header of the third “Rule”, “linking policy and communication” it is stated that “everyone must use a clear and consistent explanation of climate change” and “government policy and communications on climate change must be consistent.” Indeed. If the lie is to be sold effectively, they must all communicate the same lie. How to best sell it?

It seems that people have been listening. The advertisement of global warming is thick with apocalyptic visuals, ranging from polar bears crashing to their doom and a large family of hurricanes plaguing the continental United States.

Last but not least, the old Edward Bernays-trick is being proposed, the power of repetition:

“The communications must be sustained over time: all the most successful public awareness campaigns have been sustained consistently over many years.”

It seems that the greatest work of fiction shoved in humanity’s face in the last decade is the man-made global warming contrivance. Thanks to the leaked documents of the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, the mass mind control activities of most of the broadcasters have been revealed. Comments by high level media people about climategate indicates that the propaganda effort has blown up in the face of those who perpetuate the lie all this time. If UNESCO’s Walter Erdelen would have known that crucial information would be leaked to the general public almost three months later, he probably wouldn’t have bragged about his organisation’s role in perpetuating the myth nor highlighted UNESCO’s large role in the selling of it:

“This crucial role is largely invisible to the public eye. UNESCO has long sponsored the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) and the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS), which are precisely what their names imply, and are fundamental to the progress made by the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Fully 91% of coordinating authors of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report were WCRP scientists, and thus had the support of UNESCO behind them.”

This is a good example of a statement turning into a confession in retrospect. All those institutions mentioned were involved in the “climategate” affair and all of them have lost much of their credibility in the face of the sophisticated hoax now unraveling.

Jurriaan Maessen’s post first appearted on his blog, ExplosiveReports.com.